Next Article in Journal
Polyphenols and Human Health: The Role of Bioavailability
Previous Article in Journal
Associations of Skipping Breakfast, Lunch, and Dinner with Weight Gain and Overweight/Obesity in University Students: A Retrospective Cohort Study
Peer-Review Record

Association between Breakfast Skipping and Body Weight—A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Longitudinal Studies

Nutrients 2021, 13(1), 272;
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Nutrients 2021, 13(1), 272;
Received: 16 December 2020 / Revised: 15 January 2021 / Accepted: 17 January 2021 / Published: 19 January 2021
(This article belongs to the Section Nutritional Epidemiology)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors

The study is giving new evidence on the relationship between overweigh/obesity and skipping breakfast,  the study focused on adults; it would be goof if you include school children age groups.

However the study is excellent although the sample size is small. 

I recommend to expand the introduction and include more data on obesity and its relation to NCDs as a burden, and link it with the WHO recommendations.

You may need to add few recommendations to the public, as an outcome to your study.   


Author Response

Please find a point-by-point response in the document attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

Breakfast skipping and body weight is an important topic and this review and meta-analysis provide an overview of the current state of knowledge.

The following minor revisions are recommended for improvement before publication.


line 33: The link for reference is not working. Please check if more recent data are available (World Obesity, IOTF wbsite?)

lines 53-61: In this section I would like to have a little more information on the relationship between breakfast and body weight: potential mechanism, hypotheses, etc.

Materials and Methods

Why the following criteria for the frequency of eating breakfast were adopted: ≥ 3 days and ≤ 2 days? Information is lacking on this, please explain.


This section is well described, however, analyzes were conducted on the basis of a few studies only and with some differences in methodology. It is not the authors' fault, but it should be emphasized in the discussion as a certain limitation of the work. 


General: Are the results obtained by the authors consistent with the results of similar analyzes but concerning the pediatric population?


Author Response

Please find a point-by-point response in the document attached.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop